The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Independent Senator Tim Storer, which means it succeeded. Motions like these don't make any legal changes on their own but since they represent the will of the Senate.

Motion text

(ii) the price of renewable energy continues to decline, setting new records year on year,

(iii) utility-scale wind and solar farms are the cheapest form of new-build electricity generation in Australia today,

(iv) Australia has the highest penetration of rooftop solar in the world, with close to two million households having installed solar systems to help them to reduce their power bills, and

(v) South Australia's Honesdale Power Reserve, the world's biggest grid connected lithium-ion battery, is showing how new technology can put downward pressure on electricity prices and allow for the successful integration of high levels of wind and solar energy; and

This amendment would encourage and incentivise small businesses to invest into infrastructure and assets that would result in an energy-efficiency dividend for small businesses, which would bring Australia's emissions profile down as well as improve the bottom line of small businesses. It would also encourage and incentivise small businesses to reduce their use of fossil fuels and to fuel-switch from gas to electricity.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes, with concern, that the Adani Group (Adani) is on the record blatantly misrepresenting the number of jobs its polluting Carmichael coal mine would create;

(b) condemns Adani's deception in inflating its jobs figures sevenfold, until it was forced under oath to reveal that the true figure is in fact 1,464 direct and indirect jobs over the life of the project, rather than the 10 000 claimed;

(c) further notes that the carbon pollution from Adani's mine would significantly contribute to dangerous global warming, further endangering the Great Barrier Reef and the 70 000 jobs that rely on it; and

(d) asserts that, rather than relying on a polluting, deceitful company to provide jobs for Queenslanders, federal and state Governments should invest in renewable energy, service industries and manufacturing as the best drivers of Queensland jobs.

Motion text

(i) the Australian Government's plans to make Australia one of the top ten weapons manufacturers globally, raising us from the 20th to the 10th spot, and

(ii) the dangerous and destructive effects of the global arms trade in fuelling conflicts;

(b) re-affirms the comments of World Vision CEO, Mr Tim Costello, that Australia will be "exporting death and profiting from bloodshed";

(c) condemns the fact that the Government plans to loan $3 billion to arms manufacturers, which is equal to Australia's entire foreign aid budget, which has suffered $11 billion in cuts since 2014, and follows attempts by the Government to cut $2 billion from higher education; and

(d) calls on the Government to cease immediately this plan to turn Australia into a mercenary nation of arms dealers, and instead use the funds to revitalise our manufacturing industry around renewable energy, electric cars, advanced medical technology and education services.

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Larissa Waters, which means it was unsuccessful.

Motion text

At the end of the motion, add:

, but the Senate condemns this bill for ripping $500 million from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency's clean energy innovation grants as a dangerous and irresponsible act of sabotage, especially in a climate emergency and global transition to clean energy, and because it leaves the Coalition and Labor parties with no meaningful plan to meet Australia's Renewable Energy Target and pollution reduction target agreed at the Paris climate conference.

(iii) That the 2014 Budget proposed $1.3 billion in cuts to ARENA for the financial years 2017-18 to 2021-22 which have so far been blocked but which have caused considerable uncertainty for ARENA; and

(b) resolves That the $1.5 billion of currently legislated funding for ARENA for the financial years 2016-17 to 2021-22 will not be reduced.

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Larissa Waters. It called for the government to stop supporting new coal mining developments and start supporting a rapid transition to clean energy.

The majority voted against a motion introduced by NSW Senator Lee Rhiannon (Greens), which means it failed.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) Newcastle City Council recently passed an update to its investment policies that notes the Council's preference for environmentally and socially responsible investment, and notes reports that this policy will see the Council shift its investments away from coal and fossil fuels,

(ii) the decision has been heavily criticised by the Minister for Industry and Science (Mr Macfarlane), despite warnings from scientists that Australia must act to stave off catastrophic climate change, and

(iii) an opinion poll conducted after the Council's decision found that only one in four Newcastle residents think investing in coal is financially safe; and

(b) congratulates the Newcastle City Council on updating its investment policy and joining councils across New South Wales, such as Lake Macquarie City Council, Willoughby Council, the City of Sydney, Marrickville Council, Leichhardt Council and Lismore City Council, in adopting policies regarding environmentally and socially responsible investment.

Wording of the motion

the massive economic benefits delivered to this nation by the black coal industry and the importance it has for the employment fortunes of miners and other professionals in this nation, noting that Australia should maintain a diverse and sensible energy mix.

The majority voted in favour of a motion "that schedule 5 stand as printed", which means that the schedule will remain unchanged. This motion was put in response to an amendment to oppose that schedule, which was introduced by Greens Senator Christine Milne.

Schedule 5 amends the funding for the Australian Renewable Energy Agency ('ARENA').(Read more about this schedule in the explanatory memorandum. ) Senator Milne explained that "if the government's schedule stands, ARENA's funding would drop from just over a billion dollars down to $341 million".(Read Senator Milne's full explanation and the associated debate here, after 10.28 am. )

Background to the bills

The Clean Energy Legislation (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2014 and related bills were introduced to repeal the carbon pricing mechanism, which was introduced by the Australian Labor Party while in government. The Coalition described the mechanism as a “carbon tax” and removing it was a key policy platform during the 2013 election.(You can read more about the Coalition's policy to remove the carbon price here. )

The carbon pricing mechanism commenced on 1 July 2012.(For more information on the carbon pricing mechanism and how it works, please see the Clean Energy Regulator’s website. ) It is an emissions trading scheme that puts a price on carbon emissions. It applies to “liable entities” (a group that includes companies that emit a high level of greenhouse gases). Initially the price of carbon is fixed by the mechanism but from 1 July 2015 the price will be set by the market, though the Labor Government did announce plans to bring this forward to 1 July 2014 just before they were defeated by the Coalition in the 2013 election.

This is the third time that this package of bills have been introduced. The first time, they were rejected in the Senate during the third reading stage.(See that division here. ) The second time, they were rejected in the Senate during the committee stage.(See that division here. Read more about this second rejection of this package of bills on ABC News here or on the World Today here.)

The carbon pricing mechanism commenced on 1 July 2012.(For more information on the carbon pricing mechanism and how it works, please see the Clean Energy Regulator’s website. ) It is an emissions trading scheme that puts a price on carbon emissions. It applies to “liable entities” (a group that includes companies that emit a high level of greenhouse gases). Initially the price of carbon is fixed by the mechanism but from 1 July 2015 the price will be set by the market, though the Labor Government did announce plans to bring this forward to 1 July 2014 just before they were defeated by the Coalition in the 2013 election.

This is the second time that this package of bills has been introduced, after they were rejected in the Senate during the third reading stage the first time round.(See that division here. )

The majority voted in favour of a motion to read the bill for a third time.(Read more about the stages a bill must pass through here. ) This means that the majority reject the main idea of the bill and that it will no longer be considered.

Because this is the second time this bill has been rejected in the Senate (see below), it is potentially a trigger for a double dissolution. However, it is up to the Government to use it to call a full Senate and House of Representatives election.(Read more on ABC News here. )

The Clean Energy Finance Corporation was created by the Clean Energy Finance Corporation Bill 2012, which was introduced while the Australian Labor Party was in government. It is a fund dedicated to investing in renewable energy generation.

The majority voted against a motion to read the bill for a second time.

This means that the majority of senators reject the main idea of the act, which was to provide the Clean Energy Regulator with powers to ensure that accredited power stations that are wind farms do not create excessive noise.(Read more about the bill here, including its explanatory memorandum. )

Currently, there are questions about whether the noise generated by wind farms may cause health problems.(For example, read about the divided reactions surrounding a proposed major wind farm project in South Australia here. ) However, this is widely disputed.(For example, the South Australian Environmental Protection Authority rejected the link between wind farms and health almost a month before this vote took place (see here. ) These concerns reflect similar debates around the world in communities that are affected by wind farms.(Read more about these debates here.)

The bill was introduced by Senator Madigan, also on behalf of Senator Xenophon, to provide the Clean Energy Regulator with powers to ensure that accredited power stations that are wind farms do not create excessive noise.(Read more about the bill here, including its explanatory memorandum. )

Currently, there are questions about whether the noise generated by wind farms may cause health problems.(For example, read about the divided reactions surrounding a proposed major wind farm project in South Australia here. ) However, this is widely disputed.(For example, the South Australian Environmental Protection Authority rejected the link between wind farms and health almost a month before this vote took place (see here. ) These concerns reflect similar debates around the world in communities that are affected by wind farms.(Read more about these debates here.)

This means that the majority of senators agree that the bill should be passed in the Senate. Since the bill has already passed in the House of Representatives, the bill can now become law.

Background to the bill

The bill was introduced to establish the Clean Energy Finance Corporation as a body corporate and establish the Clean Energy Finance Corporation Special Account.(Learn more about the Clean Energy Finance Corporation on Radio National Breakfast. ) The development and managing of this account is referred at as the 'investment mandate'.(Read more about the investment mandate here. See also the Clean Energy Finance Corporation Investment Mandate Direction 2013 here.) Its purpose is to invest strategically in renewable energy, low emissions and energy efficiency projects and technologies in Australia.

The bill was introduced to establish the Clean Energy Finance Corporation as a body corporate and establish the Clean Energy Finance Corporation Special Account.(Learn more about the Clean Energy Finance Corporation on Radio National Breakfast. ) The development and managing of this account is referred at as the 'investment mandate'.(Read more about the investment mandate here. See also the Clean Energy Finance Corporation Investment Mandate Direction 2013 here.) Its purpose is to invest strategically in renewable energy, low emissions and energy efficiency projects and technologies in Australia.

(a) notes that on 23 June 2011 the Community Affairs References Committee tabled its final report,(Read the full report here (2.7 MB). Read the Government's response to the report's recommendations here (344 KB). More information about the health concerns related to wind farms is available here.) Social and economic impact of rural wind farms containing seven recommendations, including recommendations calling for studies on the effects of wind farms on human health; and

(b) calls on the Government to:

(i) immediately act on the committee's recommendations in the report, and

(ii) support a moratorium on the construction of further wind turbines until the recommendations have been satisfactorily addressed."

Senator Birmingham's amendment to this motion was:

"That the Senate—

Omit subparagraph (b)(ii), so that paragraph (b) now reads:

(b) calls on the Government to immediately act on the committee's recommendations in the report."

(i) that it is technically possible for Australia to achieve 100 per cent renewable energy within a decade, and

(ii) that the technologies to achieve this goal, including baseload solar thermal energy with storage, are commercially available today;(Read more about thermal energy storage here.)

(b) applauds the organisations involved for their vision and efforts; and

(c) calls on the Australian Government to direct the Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism and the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency to undertake a similar study to examine the potential for a swift transition to 100 per cent renewable energy in Australia.

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Christine Milne. This means that it was unsuccessful. The motion was:

That the Senate—

(a) notes:

(i) that United States of America company, First Solar, has signed a memorandum of understanding to build a 2GW solar power station in China and that this single plant will be eight times larger than projects called for by the Solar Flagship Program (the program),(ii) that the program depends for success on significant levels of private sector capital,(iii) that the global financial crisis is exacerbating difficulties Australian companies are experiencing in accessing private sector capital for innovative renewable technologies,(iv) that, in Australia, Solar Systems has gone into voluntary administration because of a lack of investment capital, and(v) the lack of a comprehensive or coherent policy framework to encourage private sector investment in renewable energy; and(b) calls on the Government to underpin the success of the program by:(i) providing loan guarantees for commercial-scale demonstration projects,(ii) implementing a gross national feed-in tariff for small to utility scale renewable energy projects, and(iii) planning and funding electricity grid extensions to connect remote utility scale projects.

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Democrats Senator Lyn Allison. This means it was unsuccessful. The motion was:

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) in December 2007 Ausra Inc. announced that it will build a manufacturing plant in Nevada for solar thermal power systems,(ii) Ausra’s innovations in mirror systems have brought the price of solar power down to the level of gas-fired power and is expected soon to be price competitive with coal-fired power, and(iii) the plant will produce 700 MW a year in solar thermal power systems for the American Southwest;

(b) congratulates the founder of Ausra, world-renowned, Dr David Mills, for this development and for his longstanding solar technology innovation at the University of Sydney, including:

(c) regrets that the economic benefits of this important innovation in renewable, clean, base load power have been lost to Australia; and(d) urges the Government to:

(i) recognise that Australia, like Nevada and California, has excellent sources of solar energy from which to generate solar thermal base load power, and(ii) provide the necessary incentives for the technology to also be established in Australia.

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Australian Democrats Senator Lyn Allison, which means it was unsuccessful. The motion was:

That the Senate:

(a) notes:

(i) the announcement by the Victorian State Government that a desalination plant costing $3.1 billion will be built near Wonthaggi to provide a third of Melbourne’s demand for water, approximately 150 billion litres, by 2012,(Read more about this proposed desalination plant on Wikipedia here.) (ii) that the desalination plant and associated pumping of more than 200 km will likely emit more than a million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions a year and increase electricity use in Victoria by 2 per cent,(iii) that the Victorian Government intends to ‘offset’ greenhouse emissions through the purchase of renewable energy,(iv) that the ongoing drought in Victoria is highly likely to be related to climate change,(v) that 95 per cent of Victoria’s electricity is from ageing, low efficiency, brown coal-fired generators,(vi) that $3.1 billion could fund rebates for approximately 2 million household water tanks that could provide 80 billion litres of water for cistern, laundry and garden use, and(vii) that coal-fired power generation in Victoria uses approximately 400 billion litres of water a year;

(b) urges the Victorian State Government to develop desalination only if necessary after:

(i) stringent standards are implemented for water appliances,(ii) substantial quantities of potable water have been displaced by stormwater or other harvested water,(iii) water reticulation infrastructure leaks have been fixed,(iv) water intensive industry and commercial operations are water efficient,(v) all Victorians have low flow shower heads, dual flush cisterns and grey water systems, and(vi) there is widespread application of water sensitive urban design; and

(c) encourages the Victorian State Government to ensure that any desalination still required, uses only renewable-powered technology.

(ii) Australians support a future based on new renewable energy industries rather than a continuing reliance on coal or a move to nuclear power, and

(iii) the renewable options of more solar panels (91 per cent support) and more wind turbines (82 per cent support) were favoured alongside the proposal of reducing overall energy consumption (78 per cent support); and

(b) calls on the Government to introduce effective policies that will result in significant clean energy investment and greenhouse abatement through support for:

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Democrats Senator Lyn Allison. This means that the motion was unsuccessful. The motion was:

That the Senate:(a) notes that:(i) the World Wind Association has reported that the global installed capacity of wind energy at the end of December 2006 was 73 904 MW,(ii) based on the accelerated wind development in 2006, the World Wind Energy Association has increased its prediction for 2010 and now expects 160 000 MW to be installed by the end of 2010,(iii) the wind industry worldwide between 1997 and 2006 experienced a tenfold increase in installed capacity worldwide,(iv) the currently installed wind power capacity generates more than 1 per cent of global electricity consumption,(v) Germany has the highest proportion of installed capacity, where 5 per cent of electricity consumption is from wind, while Denmark’s is as high as 20 per cent,(Read more about the wind power in Germany here and wind power in Denmark here. ) and(vi) this compares to wind energy in Australia in 2006 representing only 0.5 per cent of Australia’s electricity consumption;(Read more about wind power in Australia here.) and(b) calls on the Government to increase and extend the Mandatory Renewable Energy Target to support wind energy and other renewable technologies in order to meet with world minimum practice and to strive to world best practice.

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Australian Democrats Senator Lyn Allison.

This means that the motion was rejected.

The motion was:

That the Senate-

(a) notes that:

(i) in 2000, Germany introduced a solar scheme requiring electricity companies to buy back electricity generated from household panels connected to the grid at premium price rather than at the normal wholesale electricity rate,

(ii) the German scheme has meant approximately 400 000 households have now installed solar panels,

(iii) the German scheme has lead to a boom in the photovoltaic (PV) industry with revenues expected to be $25 billion in 2006, increasing to $100 billion by 2010,

(iv) Germany’s success with the scheme has led to Spain, Italy, France, Greece and Canada introducing almost identical schemes,

(v) in 2004, Germany passed a new law that guaranteed people who built solar parks a minimum price for each kilowatt of electricity that was two to three times the market price, for example, a German pig farmer struggling with drought took advantage of the scheme and covered his 200 acre farm with 10 050 solar panels, which at full capacity could supply power to all 7 000 residents of the local village resulting in the farmer making more than $600 000 a year from the sale of this electricity, and

(vi) California has developed the ‘ Million Solar Roofs’ plan that will provide 3 000 megawatts of additional solar generation by 2018 using a combination of regulatory and market mechanisms;

(b) notes that an Australia-wide feed-in tariff could increase the number of PV units in Australia from 10 000 to 150 000 by 2010; and

(c) calls on the Federal Government to work with state governments to introduce a solar scheme similar to that in Germany.

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Labor Senator Kim Carr. This means that the motion was unsuccessful.

The motion was:

"That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:(Read more about what a 'matter of urgency' is here. ) The failure of the Minister for the Environment and Heritage (Senator Ian Campbell) to follow due process in assessing the environmental impact of the Bald Hills wind farm in Victoria, thereby undermining the legitimacy of national environmental approval processes."(Read more about Senator Campbell's controversial decision on ABC News here and on The World Today here.)

(ii) a breakthrough in solar energy technology, developed by the CSIRO and a private company, with a turbine that has the potential to replace coal-fired power stations in 20 years, and

(iii) that the CSIRO has had to look offshore for investment funding to advance its work on the solar turbine technology; and

(b) calls on the Australian Government to re-prioritise its policy and funding objectives to provide more support for renewable energy so that Australian breakthrough research is not forced offshore for further development and commercialisation.

No

Yes (strong)

Not passed by a large majority

How
"voted moderately against"
is worked out

The MP's votes count towards a weighted average where the most important votes get
50 points,
less important votes get
10 points,
and less important votes for which the MP was absent get
2 points.
In important votes the MP gets awarded the full
50 points
for voting the same as the policy,
0 points
for voting against the policy, and
25 points
for not voting. In less important votes, the MP gets
10 points
for voting with the policy,
0 points
for voting against, and
1
(out of 2)
if absent.

Then, the number gets converted to a simple english language phrase based on the range of values it's within.

No of votes

Points

Out of

Most important votes (50 points)

MP voted with policy

0

0

0

MP voted against policy

2

0

100

MP absent

2

50

100

Less important votes (10 points)

MP voted with policy

2

20

20

MP voted against policy

17

0

170

Less important absentees (2 points)

MP absent*

12

12

24

Total:

82

414

*Pressure of other work means MPs or
Senators are not always available to vote – it does not always
indicate they have abstained. Therefore, being absent on a less
important vote makes a disproportionatly small
difference.